Post facto, at least, the customer behaved properly. I have seen black customers call out store employees for watching them too closely, and they sometimes do it in an abusive and threatening way. Perhaps they have cause for anger, but, from what I've seen, their anger was more likely to engender resentment than respect.....The old woman was perhaps prejudiced, but with the very old and the very young allowances must be made. The customer was more ageist than the greeter was racost.

In the armed services the use of the terms "you people" and "your people" is QUITE common and has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with race, e.g., "move your people into the staging area," etc. Or, addressing members of one's own command: "I want you people to understand that you are absolutely forbidden to...."

On the other hand, it's clear that Marge initiated the aggressive physical contact at about 0.14Running after and grabbing a customer by the arm and then proceding to check every item in a large cart at a glacial pace with no clear motivation is pretty intrusive and I wouldn't put up with it. If you have grounds for suspicion call the police otherwise stay out of my face.

How many random daily little humiliations are Americans willing to put up with?

wv: gillying, what they used to call shoplifting when Marge was a teenager.

The customer was detained for a long time and treated as if she were under suspicion. Why? We can't hear what is being said, but at the crucial point, the customer grabs at the receipt, and I think the greeter struggles to keep it. Both women lose their footing, but the older woman goes down.

"In the armed services the use of the terms "you people" and "your people" is QUITE common and has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with race, e.g., "move your people into the staging area," etc. Or, addressing members of one's own command: "I want you people to understand that you are absolutely forbidden to....""

Yeah, but if "you people" is said *to one person* it can't have that meaning. In this case, the woman is being referred to in relations to a stereotype of a particular group. If you are the face of the corporation, talking to a customer, you need to have some sense about what the customer might think, even if the customer misunderstands. Don't say "you people" to a black person. What's the point of saying "people like you" to any individual in a customer/merchant situation?

This is reminding me a little of the Elizabeth Edwards discussion we were having the other day. We feel sympathetic to people with incurable cancer and people who are 100 years old. We treat them with special respect. But they shouldn't be using our special respect to manipulate and abuse us.

If a 100-year-old woman isn't able to handle the greeter job properly, Wal-Mart should not put her in that position. She was doing weirdly invasive security. I don't even think that should be called a "greeter." It's a corporate choice to use a certain type of person as a security worker, and the idea must be something like: Customers will be docile and compliant and feel a sense of shame about shoplifting if grandmother is watching. The customer really could say "Fuck you, grandma," but won't. We see the initial submission. The very old woman is inherently disarming. But then she turns into an exasperating snoop. When are you allowed to take your receipt and leave? Oh, but if you grab your receipt, grandmother might topple over, especially if grandmother is gripping that receipt for dear life. That was supposed to inspire endless compliance from the customer. I blame Wal-Mart for structuring its business that way.

"...Running after and grabbing a customer by the arm and then proceding to check every item in a large cart at a glacial pace with no clear motivation is pretty intrusive and I wouldn't put up with it.."

glacial pace? How fast do you think she should be moving?

No clear motivation? Base on what?

I wouldn't put up with it. Probably not form a little old lady but given a 6'4" 265 lbs male in his prime and all we'd hear out of your mouth is "Yes, sir. Yes, sir."

No, it's more like the TSA hiring white grannies so that we customers will submit when the hands go down our pants. And we won't speak up about the failure to change the gloves that have already felt up the genitalia of other customers. It would be mean to affront grandma.

If there was motivation I think the "6'4" 265 lbs male in his prime" would have been sent. This was either a customer randomly selected to be humiliated by Wal-Mart and/or profiled as one of 'those people' by Marge.

How many random personal checks are you willing to put up with?

Me, being me, would probably be more or less polite to Marge during the check but if I weren't in a hurry I'd go back and complain and return everything I'd bought.

I used to know a 22 year old (white) girl that shop-lifted from Walmart. What she did was grab a bunch of bags when she bought something, then carry them back in her purse. She'd run around and collect a bunch of stuff, then try to bag it on the sly and walk out with it. Of course she got caught eventually.

What Walmart and other stores are doing here is trying to deter theft. The amount of shop-lifting that goes on in a place like Walmart is enormous and it affects the cost of goods we all buy.

If a 100-year-old woman isn't able to handle the greeter job properly, Wal-Mart should not put her in that position. She was doing weirdly invasive security. I don't even think that should be called a "greeter."

Exactly. To my mind a greeter at WalMart is one who greets. "Hello, welcome to WalMart. We are having a special on yada yada. The pharmacy is over there. etc" Helpful directions and trying to give the customers some guidance.

NOT being a policewoman or store cop.

WalMart, or more precisely, the Store Manager at that location, made a bad decision here.

"No, it's more like the TSA hiring white grannies so that we customers will submit when the hands go down our pants. And we won't speak up about the failure to change the gloves that have already felt up the genitalia of other customers. It would be mean to affront grandma."

The Walmart exit checkers I have seen, greet the customers with a smile as they are approaching the exit and sometimes ask to see the receipt and give the basket a cursory once over. I do not know if this is random or based on every so many customers, or whatever, but I am certain that Walmart policy does not include running out of the store after the customer and subjecting them to the kind of treatment Ms. Speelman gave this customer.

Ann: The customer was detained for a long time and treated as if she were under suspicion. Why?

You've never enountered this? Its common in Maryland. You're the only one in the store, you run your groceries through the checkout line, the cashier bags everything and gives you a receipt, you push your cart to the door and..

some obnoxious person is at the store exit to make sure your receipt matches up with your cart. Even though you haven't triggered any alarms.

Its the most annoying practice. And I wonder if its to check the cashiers for theft-rings, not the customers. I never stop for these people. And I actually enjoy their impotent protests as a wheel the cart to my car.

We can't hear what is being said, but at the crucial point, the customer grabs at the receipt, and I think the greeter struggles to keep it. Both women lose their footing, but the older woman goes down.

Do you not see Metcalf put her right hand on Speelman and push her away at 1:11? I think thats why Spellman went down.

I blame Wal-Mart. Seriously.

Me too. I think its a stupid and insulting practice. But, based on the vid, I no longer believe Metcalf's account of what happened.

Similar to Beth's question about Alaska, I should ask: How many commenters shop at Wal Mart?

I do on occasion. They have a very nice, new clean super store in the nearest large town.

Things we especially buy:

White Stag brand casual clothing. Tee shirts for $4 !! Knee high socks. Really good deals on stuff that I'm going to wear out in the yard and get all stained up anyway. Underwear, bras. All good name brands.

Hubby's work boots. He is going to ruin them in short order so why not buy the $25 pair instead of the $150 RedWing boots. Underwear. Work socks

Office supplies.

Bandaids etc.

BIRD FOOD. The best prices especially on the black thistle seeds for the finches.

WalMart is a great great place to buy basic everyday items at lower prices.

If people are to snobby to shop there...they are only hurting themselves.

Nothing wrong with the policy, it's the execution. I've seen this in other stores, especially electronic stores, Guitar Center and others where it's easy to shoplift.

The key is to have a friendly person ask to see your reciept as part a routine. It's generally no big deal at all. In fact, it's no deal - stores need to have reasonable security.

The problem here is the manner in which this old lady was addressing a CUSTOMER. Man, that is bad PR no matter how you look at it. You want security, but you also want your employees to treat customers in a certain way. "You people" is not that way. Even if there was no "incident" here, why would this young woman want to come back to shop where they refer to her that way.

Its hard for me to tell from the video whether her falling over was accidental or not. A person of character would have helped her up, however.

To me, the more salient point, from a social perspective is this: we are using current societal norms to judge someone who was born in 1911, and was an adult in 1929. Yes, people can change, but can anyone deny the overwhelming effect your formative years have on you? Her formative years were at a time when language like what was commonplace and casual and not considered offensive (even though it IS offensive).

Note that I am not trying to excuse racism here. I am only trying to find a reason why it might not have been as vicious (in her mind) as it would seem to a casual observer. If this were a 30 something person - or even a 60-something person - there really would have been no excuse.

While I agree it appears that the older woman went a bit beyond just checking for a receipt/matching items, it also appears that she was pushed backwards by the woman when she went to grab the receipt back. Pretty bad when its okay to roll a 'trash-talking' old lady. Ever hear 'certain people' talk to each other before? They drop MF's like gum wrappers without batting an eye. 'Marge' should be up on assault charges, period. If someone MF's me, I may want to flatten their nose, but I also know I'll go to jail regardless of what they said to provoke.

No, it's more like the TSA hiring white grannies so that we customers will submit when the hands go down our pants.

I think that's exactly it.

Most people defer to the elderly and treat them respectfully. When you want customers to submit to a security check that the store doesn't actually have a legal right to force on you, using people we're naturally deferential to for the job makes sense.

Okay. I like Walmart a lot. And I shop at a Walmart frequently - (incidentally, at this predominantly-black Walmart, the usually-black checkers have never once asked to check me, a decently-dressed white man, so I definitely believe profiling is going on) - but I side with the customer here. Legally, I don't believe the greeter has any claim at all on that receipt. It is the customer's personal property, and once consent is withdrawn it must be given back, and the customer is entitled to use a reasonable amount of force to prevent unlawful interference with their property, which would include, in my opinion, the snatching back of the receipt.

Of course, as with the police, the best idea is not to consent in the first place. "Can I see your receipt please?" "No, thank you."

I've watched the scuffle portion 3 more times, and I don't see that the customer shoved the greeter. I see the customer grabbing the receipt and the greeter holding on. Then I see hard to decipher frames of video in which hands go back and forth and the old woman's hand appears to be part of a back-and-forth struggle (presumably for the receipt). Then the old woman falls. I don't see the customer just hitting or shoving the old woman.

"Costco members pay something like $50 a year for the privilege of being subjected to this abuse. It is a membership club, not a store like Walmart."

B-Jay's Wholesale Club also charges about $50 for the same...you can't leave the store without some lackey performing a cursory 'check' of your receipt/cart contents. It really is a joke. Thats why I don't shop at these types of places. As far as Walmart is concerned, it has gotten so low-brow that I avoid this knuckle-draggers' haunt like the Plague...

Do you not see Metcalf put her right hand on Speelman and push her away at 1:11? I think thats why Spellman went down.

The frame rate isn't good enough to determine if Metcalf pushed Spellman away or if Metcalf just shoved past her.

What's interesting to me is Spellman touching (grabbing?) Metcalf's shoulder to stop her. If she followed that up with a racist remark -- and apparently she did -- then I don't blame Metcalf for not helping her up. It would take quite a bit of chutzpah for Spellman to expect to be helped up by her, for that matter.

I've watched the scuffle portion 3 more times, and I don't see that the customer shoved the greeter. I see the customer grabbing the receipt and the greeter holding on.

I see the customer place her right hand on the greeter and shove, at 1:10. But the vid is really to choppy for me to be certain."

I watch the reality crime show "The First 48" which deals with homicides. There is frequent use of videos as a source of potential leads in the crime. I'm gobsmacked at the poor quality and resolution of the videos. Just as the video that is the subject of this thread the quality is so poor it doesn't really clarify anything.

B-Jay's Wholesale Club also charges about $50 for the same...you can't leave the store without some lackey performing a cursory 'check' of your receipt/cart contents. It really is a joke. Thats why I don't shop at these types of places.

Why would you take this personally? These stores lose millions of dollars a year to shoplifters and inside theft. It is reasonable for them to take reasonable measures for security.

If you have not stolen anything, then this is just a routine check (which takes a second) which they feel they need to do because ... again ... they lose millions of dollars every year to theft.

Overreaction to this is just one more way so many people are "looking" for some reason to be insulted all day every day. As I said above, if you really are insulted, that's different.

Maybe 'you people' refers to people young enough to be her grandchildren?

From the article:

Speelman told prosecutors that "these types of people" often become upset when she checks their receipts, the report says. When she was asked to clarify what she meant by "these types of people," Speelman said, "Mexicans, Spanish and colored people,"

"Maybe 'you people' refers to people young enough to be her grandchildren? My grandmother refers to the youth of America this way."

I was waiting for this - could it be just another pedestrian case of someone looking to be offended?

I'm not so sure. That old lady made double time chasing the shopper out of the store. I certainly would have been annoyed. What I usually do in those instances is use humor to try and break some ice.

I'm not sure I would have bolted though after the old lady went ass over teakettle.

Remember, this is a store that people 1. camp out overnight on Black Friday and other ridiculous shopping days and 2. where cameras are rolling when the doors open so we can witness people trampling each other to be the first to grab 1 of 5 toaster ovens on sale.

Walmart should fire her and institute a policy of having only trained security people randomly check receipts. If you are going to give an employee that much authority, she should be accountable for her actions, no matter what her age or sex or race. And of course the employer is ultimately responsible, or should be, for the actions of an employee carrying out company policy on company property.

I'm not a lawyer but it seems like Metcalfe has grounds for a lucrative settlement from Walmart.

What really bothers me is that whatever happens the only winners will be the greedy shysters representing all parties. Does it not bother any of you great legal minds that this 100-year old woman who has been knocked to the ground has had to lawyer up.

If you have not stolen anything, then this is just a routine check (which takes a second)

Did you not see her cart packed with bags of goods? A meaningful check would have taken twenty minutes.

If I were the shopper, I would sue for assault, because the greeter grabbed her, and false imprisonment, because the greeter would not let her go in a reasonable time, and kept her receipt -- the sole evidence of her payment -- to keep her from leaving. Let Walmart explain their door procedures in court.

"Why would you take this personally? These stores lose millions of dollars a year to shoplifters and inside theft. It is reasonable for them to take reasonable measures for security.

If you have not stolen anything, then this is just a routine check (which takes a second) which they feel they need to do because ... again ... they lose millions of dollars every year to theft.

Overreaction to this is just one more way so many people are "looking" for some reason to be insulted all day every day. As I said above, if you really are insulted, that's different."

I don't take it personally, I just take my shopping dollars elsewhere to avoid a ridiculous 'faux' inspection. If they really accounted for everything in your cart, traffic jams to leave the store would result. Solution: put the checkout counters near the front door.

I do agree as I state in another post that this may have been a case of looking to be offended but the old lady dragged the shopper back in the store.

These stores lose millions of dollars a year to shoplifters and inside theft. It is reasonable for them to take reasonable measures for security.

With all due respect, the money they lose to shoplifters isn't my problem. I'm responsible for $0 of that theft.

Certainly they have an incentive to do this, and I usually comply because that's easier and I just want to get out of the store and go the heck home. But I have absolutely no reason to be pleased they do it.

It also doesn't seem like a useful way of preventing shoplifting. In an electronics store where customers exits with a handful of relatively expensive items, sure. But look at that video -- Metcalf has a full shopping cart. If she was trying to steal stuff she easily could, just by hiding it inside the bags under the stuff she DID pay for.

On behalf of WalMart, I would say that minimum wage employees sometimes lack judgement. Youngsters are impulsive, and geezers are cranky. Solomon doesn't work for minimum wage....If white people should be aware of the sensitivities of blacks, blacks should be tolerant of the pace of the old. "As a I am, you will be; as you are I once was." Nobody looks very good in this incident, but the customer looks worse.

So they lived in one of the states that didn't have those sorts of requirements, then. That still doesn't explain why you think their race was relevant. I'm guessing you believe only non-whites were affected by those laws.

Anyway, the point is that they fought for an America that allowed ID checks, poll taxes, etc. Ergo your whole "they didn't fight for blah blah blah" schtick is silly -- objectively speaking, they DID fight for those things.

What really bothers me is that whatever happens the only winners will be the greedy shysters representing all parties. Does it not bother any of you great legal minds that this 100-year old woman who has been knocked to the ground has had to lawyer up.

Greedy bastards!

I love this too !!!

Two people get into a physical altercation involving racial profiling and offensive comments, but ...

IT"S THOSE F******G LAWYERS.G*******N THEM.

She had to lawyer up. Well duh, she's making racially offensive comments to customers. Wow, that too must be THE F*****G lawyers fault.

You People out there just found out that receipt checkers profile for likely shop lifters. That is their job. They also look at the "Number of Items" printed at the bottom of the receipt and then the employee quick scans for the number of items in the buggy. The extra procedures are supposed to start when there is an obvious difference. There is no item by item check done until then. This old lady was too mentally slow to be doing this delicate work. But it is hard for Walmart to find honest younger folks who are potentially smart enough to form inside-outside rings of shoplifters. We ain't China.

If the NAACP hasn't bothered to adopt the Acceptable Euphemism of the Week why should your Nanna?

I understand this NOW better than I did at seventeen. When I was seventeen I took the distinction between "people of color" and "colored people" very seriously indeed. And of course I knew better than my grandmother, and all other adults, when I was seventeen. But I must getting dumber as I get older, because I find myself agreeing with them much more often, on a lot of things.

William, so what? In most cases, the only reason they can do the check in the first place is because people consent to it. (Walmart probably would have a legal right to stop and retrieve merchandise that they had an actual reasonable belief was being stolen, but I kind of doubt that a combination of racial profiling and indiscriminate policy is going to qualify as a reasonable belief.)

When the aged and/or infirmed 'greeter' at the local Wal_Mart asks me to show a receipt for my purchases as I am leaving the store, do you know what I do?Well do ya?! First you all should know that I am a white male 56 year old person. That should give you a hint.I meekly show my receipt.

"You People out there just found out that receipt checkers profile for likely shop lifters. That is their job. They also look at the "Number of Items" printed at the bottom of the receipt and then the employee quick scans for the number of items in the buggy. The extra procedures are supposed to start when there is an obvious difference. There is no item by item check done until then. This old lady was too mentally slow to be doing this delicate work. But it is hard for Walmart to find honest younger folks who are potentially smart enough to form inside-outside rings of shoplifters."

So design the store so this type of activity is unnecessary. The checkout area should lead directly out the door. The longer it takes to exit the store after checking out, the more opportunity there is for all kinds of mischief, both by exiting customers and employees alike.

So did the woman in question, pauls lane. And stood there for over a minute, apparently enduring a bunch of "you people" talk and accusations that she hadn't paid for things that were printed right there on the receipt.

Speelman told prosecutors that "these types of people" often become upset when she checks their receipts, the report says. When she was asked to clarify what she meant by "these types of people," Speelman said, "Mexicans, Spanish and colored people,"

I'm not convinced she's a racist.

Her experience working at Walmart: its always minorities that give her trouble.

My experience shopping at Walmart: its always minorities I see cops arresting for shoplifting.

I put myself through college working as (among other things) a cashier at a grocery store and shoplifting was always a problem.

But, in a grocery store, a hell of a lot of the stealing is done by employees. This was a college town and may not be representative.

I think what happened in this case is that a very old woman, with the corresponding prejudices, decided to be extra officious. The Walmarts in my area do not check receipts, so it's not not a nationwide policy to do so (or some store managers choose to ignore it). I can't believe that it is a national policy to grab customers' receipts and chase them out the door. I think this has much more to do with the employee's poor judgement, likely due to her very advanced age.

I think what happened in this case is that a very old woman, with the corresponding prejudices,

or experience with minorites

decided to be extra officious.

The police statement says she singled the shopper out because she had unbagged merchandise in her cart.

I can't believe that it is a national policy to grab customers' receipts and chase them out the door.

Reverse that - "follow them out and ask for their receipt" (I didn't see her "grab" the rcpt out of customer's hand)

I think this has much more to do with the employee's poor judgement, likely due to her very advanced age.

I was joking upthread at 11:52. But her poor judgement could just as easily be due to her experience dealing with minorities at Walmart. Prob was the last straw, esp since the customer was giving her lip.

@ Dontread 2010...I agree. But this system seems to meet the real needs well, unless a slow minded and unfriendly checker is employed. But that seems to be a rare exception. The racial hostility is the wild card here. Unless she has done it before, then there is no Walmart liability for negligent retention. Clearly it is not in the scope and course of her employment to verbally disrespect customers...but a good trial lawyer will get a jury to award damages anyhow. I still want to find out how CVS did on the choke hold murder of a shoplifter of a toothbrush.

Really, the only way to ascertain if such a full-cart was fully paid-for would be to bring it back into the store and re-scan everything. It is not reasonable to expect a customer to patiently accept this. Standing around a cold sidewalk while an old lady pointlessly pokes-around, with no end in sight, would be exasperating.

If I were a retail manager, I would encourage cooperation by giving customers an incentive. Here is the script, "You have been selected randomly for a test of our checker's accuracy. To compensate for your lost time, we will give you a $10 gift card."

Her experience working at Walmart: its always minorities that give her trouble. My experience shopping at Walmart: its always minorities I see cops arresting for shoplifting.

Uh huh. So she's not racist; it is just that "its always minorities that give her trouble" (they're "always" the ones who shoplift, you know). She "has experience with minorities", and sometimes she loses her temper when they "give her lip".

Did I get it right? That's the hill you've chosen to die on in this particular fight?

Late coming back in here, but I wonder if the checkers at Walmart and COSTCO (we frequent both--both in New Orleans and in the Marina del Rey/Venice/Santa Monica/Culver City area--and have found everyone unfailingly polite) are there mainly for ins purposes as their "checks" are mostly cursory at best.

Fen:"Its the most annoying practice. And I wonder if its to check the cashiers for theft-rings, not the customers. I never stop for these people. And I actually enjoy their impotent protests as a wheel the cart to my car."

The first is a good point, the second a great idea. I think I'll add it to my bucket list. Walk past the exit checker like you don't hear him/her.

it is just that "its always minorities that give her trouble" (they're "always" the ones who shoplift, you know). She "has experience with minorities", and sometimes she loses her temper when they "give her lip".

Really, the only way to ascertain if such a full-cart was fully paid-for would be to bring it back into the store and re-scan everything. It is not reasonable to expect a customer to patiently accept this.

Not only is it unreasonable, the store has no actual right to ask for it. Once you've bought something from a store, it isn't the store's anymore. You are doing them a personal favor by deigning to LET them inspect what you're carrying.

This is an ambiguous situation where you can argue both sides of the case.. It's interesting to note, however, that PC sympathies are more with the young and the black than the old and the poor. Perhaps if it later turns out that she is an elderly transvestite, the polarities can be reversed.

Sometimes I think those people need to be less paranoid. In this case the elderly lady clearly has racist attitudes.

When I'm in Walmart the people that irritate me the most are the fat people. Blocking aisles, driving motorized carts like maniacs, those people make my shopping harder and dangerous. If you don't think we have an obesity epidemic, visit Walmart.

And why is WalMart having greeters -- old people -- act as pseudo-policemen anyway? Why should a greeter have any right to detain you? If this is company policy, I think it's bad policy.

It's very hard not to notice any general patterns out there that have to do with face/neighborhood/upbringing etc.

I worked on a campaign this summer and stuck my nose into all kinds of places in my very racially diverse greater area, and I could give you an analysis right down to the *block* of a neighborhood.

And yeah, race had a big part to do with the feel of a neighborhood. if you didn't start recognizing some patterns and how to interact given your position/race/background/etc, you were unsuccessful - or even dead in certain areas.

Nothing says "I'm white from a nice white neighborhood" than the absolute, idiot refusal to adapt.

Basically, the old white lady would have been better off noticing the patterns she did and then shutting up about them - yet another form of adaptation - but still noticing and reacting to them.

By the way "noticing patterns" does not equal "treating people like shit".

they simply match the number of items in your cart with the number of items on your receipt.

They are also looking to see if you slipped in a 'big ticket' item in the cart.

"Hmmmm.... I don't see a computer, dvd player,computer game, camera, or whatever on the receipt."

I've never been stopped or checked at WalMart. Costco, where I shop once every other month, we get funneled to the door from the check out stations and the receipts are always checked against the cart.

I don't mind the receipt checks. I choose to shop at the place, and I like the stuff there to be as cheap as possible. The more people can steal, the more expensive the stuff. You can shop at places that do not do these checks, you'll just have to pay more.

However, if a receipt check went like this for me, I'd be calling a manager, and I would expect to never see that employee at the store again.

This is a little off subject , but once at a closing of a pretty obvious mortgage fraud in the late 2005 heydays of shell buyers and unrealistic inflated prices, my attorney employee refused to close one and asked for my help the next day when it was rescheduled while we asked the lender for written directions. I have a persona that can usually easily deal with confrontations. I politely explained to the Black borrower that we could not close it, but some other attorney might. The white sellers were first to get angry and demand why... because he wanted to see if I dared to call them all crooks. My traditional self simply replied to the white folks that, "you people know why." That set off the black folks. Anger and indignation is a chose in action for them, it seems. Finally we opened the doors and told them they had to leave, whereupon a football player looking 20 year old guy literally jumped back into my face. I instinctively blocked his raising arms down to his side as a wrestler's reactions will do. Then he accused me of assaulting him. The local police came over in 30 minutes and we told the officer what happened. Fortunately we were well known, especially my son, with the police department, And it ended there.

Where you went wrong traditional guy is that you didn't tell the black folks that they were getting ripped off. I would have said "Brother you are getting hosed. You better get someone else to look into this for you. Don't be trusting the white devil if you know what I mean."

Turn it around on them. Get them thinking. You can't cheat an honest man. If they are doing something crooked they will totally think the other party is screwing them. They would have left and thanked you for it.

Rev...My point was that two sides of a table sometimes require calling one side different from the other side. It's that old Logic curse in communications. My other point was how much I learned that lesson about the innocent phrase "You people" being a code word to blacks. If they would explain the code words, it would be easier. In my next life, I am going to come back as a perfect person, because I have learned every mistake the hard way in this one.

If the facts were the same, and it was a one hundred year old black woman who was dispatched in such a way by a white woman in a hurry, I wonder if any here would argue the case.....I suppose we all argue our self interest. I'm old and cranky and I don't suppose my disposition will improve as I get older. I expect a little consideration from you punks.... Those who are arguing on the woman's behalf are not making an argument for tolerance so much as for their right to proceed to the parking lot without undue delay. Emptor uber alles, and if some creaky old bitch gets in your way, she will know the wrath of Khan. Enough with coddling these centenarians.

Trooper...The buyer was an 18 year old young man wearing a Gangsta clothes, but his loan application said he had 2 years work in at a $90,000 per year job in Chicago where he came from. These deals were put together with a highly inflated price, using a fradulent appraiser, and with the sellers giving large money back to the ring after the deal closed. The threats to me came from the ring's leader who saw $30,000 profit disappearing. The Attorney they took it to was later indicted by the Federal DA and sentenced for cooperating in closing these deals. This was back when everybody in the deal knew it was a fraud, but the Wall Street Mortgage brokers couldn't get bad loans created fast enough. Honesty is a better Long Term plan. In fact you need to meet a better class of lawyers.

"You people" shows prejudice -- there was only one people there, with no indication she was acting like all the rest of her kind. "You people" differentiates people like the customer -- bad, disobedient, unworthy of repectful treatment -- from people like the employee -- good, fair, God's representative on earth.

that PC sympathies are more with the young and the black than the old and the poor.

Do Americans like the officious petty tyrant? The hall monitor? Which frat did you prefer in Animal House? Did you identify with Dean Wormer?

I think we can relate to being a big box customer far more than to being a big box door Nazi.

I never stop for these people. And I actually enjoy their impotent protests as a wheel the cart to my car.

Hey don't sweat it Mikio. They only follow asian people around in pet shops. There has been a rash of puppies missing in Milwaukee. And a strange increase in the number of dim sum joints.

What?! And you’re just sitting there commenting on it?! What kind of pansy-ass… Goddamn it! Quick! Saddle up and go round them doggies up, Trooper York! Do it for Milwaukee! Do it for America! Do it for…